I'll begin by saying I'm very happy this won and I look forward to reading it.

I actually started Middlemarch years ago and read probably a fourth of it. It's on my challenge list for this year though so I was planning to read it soon either way, but now I also look forward to the discussion about it.

And I think I'll start from the beginning. I remember much of what I'd already read, but still I'd like to start over with such a long break in between.

I read this a long time ago and this time--as I work my way through this book-- I'm impressed by a number of things: I'll be fairly general here so no spoiler tags should be necessary.

First there is the sheer intellectual brilliance of George Eliot. One is always aware of a powerful mind organizing and controlling the vast canvas of this novel. But for me an even more impressive quality is her ability to create sympathetic, complex characters whose belief systems and social attitudes may vary significantly from her own. This ability to focus with a compassionate understanding is something I find very moving.

I feel like I need to create a diagram to keep track of the complicated threads of society & relations between the Middlemarchers!

I also found the huge canvas with all the various characters a difficulty at times.

Here is a link to a character map made out by a member of Library Thing Group Reads; It's in the first post and simply gives character relationships. It could easily be adapted to provide a growing mind-map for the individual reader. Some readers like to add bookmarks or location references on a progressing mind-map to passages they find significant.

I was looking over some background material to Middlemarch in my old pb copy of the novel and ran across a couple of points that I thought were interesting. Eliot started the novel in 1869 and the original plot was going to be based on the Featherstone-Vincy material. For some reason the novel just wouldn't work and she gave it up in despair in 1870. Then in November of that year she started writing a new story. "Miss Brooke" which took off. In 1871 she decided to combine the two plots giving us the spine of the multi-plot novel mentioned by HarryT above. Finally, in 1872 Middlemarch was complete.

Personally, I have always found the Brooke section the most interesting part of the novel primarily because of the wonderful portrait of Dorothea and her painful progress to self understanding.

Another interesting point made by David Carroll in the pb copy I mentioned is that in the MS of the novel Eliot quoted a line from Goethe's Faust at the beginning and the end of the story:

She deleted this in the final printed form but Carroll says that it became her own motto. I think it conveys a sense of the painful nature of life clearly evident in much of the book which I believe focuses so much on the responsibility we bear for every choice we make and every vision we embrace.

Thanks for this, fantasyfan - it really makes sense of what seemed to be a slightly disjointed move from Dorothea going off on her honeymoon to a completely different group of people, using Dr Lydgate as the link.

This is my first book with the LBC, as I have been meaning to read "Middlemarch" for some time, and this is a great way to do it. At this stage I am only about one-quarter of the way through it.

I love the way George Eliot humanises everyone, even that dry stick Casaubon, with his rows of notebooks and his endless research. Who among us who has had to write a thesis or even a major essay, has not shied away from putting pen to paper (metaphorically these days) and felt the need to do yet more research. I did have some fellow-feeling for him over that!

I was struck by the comment about Miss Winifred Farebrother, the parson's sister, living with her brother, mother and aunt, "... nipped and subdued as single women are apt to be who spend their lives in uninterrupted subjection to their elders." She sums up the whole situation of such women in half a sentence.

What a wonderful book it is. I'm not sure how long I shall take to finish it, but I shall certainly do so. And I shall enjoy seeing what others have to say on the way through.

I love the way George Eliot humanises everyone, even that dry stick Casaubon, with his rows of notebooks and his endless research. Who among us who has had to write a thesis or even a major essay, has not shied away from putting pen to paper (metaphorically these days) and felt the need to do yet more research. I did have some fellow-feeling for him over that!

Welcome to the Literary Book Club discussion, Bookpossum. This is a great point, and I liked the way you phrased it. I like the way that Eliot is able to create sympathy with the reader for the various characters despite their vices or weaknesses. For example, one is able to identify with both Dorothea and Mr. Casaubon about how their marriage does not live up to either of their expectations, thereby making both of them melancholy in the situation.

I love the way George Eliot humanises everyone, even that dry stick Casaubon, with his rows of notebooks and his endless research. Who among us who has had to write a thesis or even a major essay, has not shied away from putting pen to paper (metaphorically these days) and felt the need to do yet more research. I did have some fellow-feeling for him over that!

What a wonderful book it is. I'm not sure how long I shall take to finish it, but I shall certainly do so. And I shall enjoy seeing what others have to say on the way through.

Let me join Bookworm Girl in welcoming you to the club. I, too really liked your insight about Casaubon--whom I have tended to dismiss too readily. And you made the point very tellingly. Thank you for sharing it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bookworm_Girl

Welcome to the Literary Book Club discussion, Bookpossum. This is a great point, and I liked the way you phrased it. I like the way that Eliot is able to create sympathy with the reader for the various characters despite their vices or weaknesses. For example, one is able to identify with both Dorothea and Mr. Casaubon about how their marriage does not live up to either of their expectations, thereby making both of them melancholy in the situation.

Yes, I tended too easily to forget that both Dorothea and Casaubon had very different but honestly held expectations about their roles in marriage. And so both deserve sympathy.

Thanks for the welcome and kind words. Excellent point about the different expectations about their marriage too.

I suppose that is really what makes this book such a great one - that all the characters are flawed and human and there is something to sympathise with in each of them - nothing is black or white, good or bad. Just so many subtle layers there to discover and appreciate. No wonder Virginia Woolf (I think) said it's a book for grown-ups.

Edit: (Ah yes, in that article you found for us, Bookworm_Girl - thanks.)

Well, I finished it last night. What a rich experience it has been to read it. A couple of thoughts:

Casaubon.
"He distrusted her affection, and what loneliness is more lonely than distrust?" That sums him up for me - for all the distress he caused Dorothea, what a miserable life he gave himself in his inability to trust and to give and accept love. I did feel sorry for him, though it was a relief when he died!

Another really good statement from earlier in the book, concerning Casaubon and Dorothea: "There is hardly any contact more depressing to a young ardent creature than that of a mind in which years full of knowledge seem to have issued in a blank absence of interest or sympathy."

Lydgate.
"He had begun to distinguish between that imagined adoration and the attraction towards a man's talent because it gives him prestige, and is like an order in his button-hole or an Honourable before his name."

What a sad and unfulfilled life he led too. But can we be too harsh in our judgement of Rosamond? She was a product of her family, and of being petted and indulged all her life simply because she was beautiful. She was shallow, vain and manipulative because she thought she was the centre of the universe and deserved whatever she wanted. But she did do the right thing by Dorothea and Ladislaw when it could all have ended in grief, so she did respond to Dorothea's goodness and generosity of spirit.

We are left to assume that Ladislaw and Dorothea had a happy marriage. I suppose we could feel that Dorothea should have remained single and done "good works" with the wealth, but how free was she to do that in reality, given the status of women at the time? At least she was able to decide to marry him despite the disapproval of various people.